• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Surges Nationally in Primary

maxparrish said:
The caucus/convention system is their normal; i.e., it is both expected and their standard (2004, and tweaked in 2012). If this is not now their normal, what is? Do you even have a point, other than the fact there are some changes you may, or may not, have approved of historically?

The rules were distributed last August, and Trump ignored them. Since then he, and his minions, have pushed the old Democratic "we were cheated" claims. Its shameless and self-serving nonsense.
Click to expand...

No, their system isn't "normal". It's a bit of a mutant creation to stop Paul and candidates like him. Every state rolls their own to be sure. But CO in recent decades have rolled a bit of a golem.
 
reinoe said:
The last shreds of what it means to be a Republican went away when the Republican Party nominated Mitt Romney.
Click to expand...

Really?

Which of the candidates of '12 should they have nominated? Cain? Perry? Santorum?

Romney was the only viable candidate running.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Oh, and one more thing - if Trump's the GOP nominee, we get back the Senate, too.
Click to expand...

You have that reversed. The GOP may lose the senate if the republican voters perceive the primary was "stolen" by the "establishment".
 
clownboy said:
You have that reversed. The GOP may lose the senate if the republican voters perceive the primary was "stolen" by the "establishment".
Click to expand...

What kind of senator or senate candidate would want to associate himself or herself with Donald trumps positions?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Gingrich and Paul did not make their sales pitch as a candidate as good as Romney did.
Click to expand...

No, not the case. The RNC establishment chose Romney, put their money and their machine behind him.
 
reinoe said:
The last shreds of what it means to be a Republican went away when the Republican Party nominated Mitt Romney.
Click to expand...

And the same might be said with the nomination of McCain as well - but Trump is the capper. Romney's platform and positions were clear and sincere plain vanilla Republican; lower taxes, concern over Russia as the number on adversary, pro-Israel, entitlement reform and repeal-replace Obamacare. In addition, Romney (unlike Trump) was clearly pro property rights and less friendly to affirmative action, and desired to appoint Scalia like conservative justices.

Trump is..."Trump". He's been on every side of every issue and party registration, often contradicts himself within a single discussion, and is opaque on many (some say most) issues. His few position statements are alternatively impossible, insignificant, incoherent or wrong-headed (e.g. his hostility to free trade and to Scalia). And among the few issues were he is clear, he is (with one exception) not Republican: affirmative action, employment rights for gays, and property rights.

Temperamentally, intellectually, and ideologically Trump is 10 times the joke of RINO McCain (who was far worse than Romney, by the way).

On only one issue did he seem resolutely "Republican", border control and no amnesty - except, as we learned in the last few months some (or all) of that is negotiable.
 
Last edited:
clownboy said:
No, not the case. The RNC establishment chose Romney, put their money and their machine behind him.
Click to expand...

How does that work, other than as an unsupported "I wanna believe it is true" fantasy?
 
clownboy said:
No, their system isn't "normal". It's a bit of a mutant creation to stop Paul and candidates like him. Every state rolls their own to be sure. But CO in recent decades have rolled a bit of a golem.
Click to expand...

You're moving goal posts. You stated that "The so-called "normal" process is not normal in CO." . Now you are saying it isn't "normal" compared to what, every other state who "rolls out their own to be sure"?

As I pointed out earlier, Cruz won under the normal (the standard and expected) system for CO. There are a variety of other State systems, each with its own set of rules and circumstances. There is not a single "normal" outside the State of Co.

It's a representative Caucus system, where individuals are voted on delegates for the state convention, followed by their voting on the delegates to the national convention. Trump ignored that he needed those votes so, as usual when he loses, resorts to after the fact is smearing and lying about Colorado as if it were some nefarious system where "voters don't count". The obviously do count, but you have to participate and win.

The "CEO" has been, managerially, AWOL.
 
Last edited:
maxparrish said:
How does that work, other than as an unsupported "I wanna believe it is true" fantasy?
Click to expand...

The RNC has a well funded grassroots machine complete with ready to go donors and "expert staff". These typically don't go to candidates until after the convention, but can easily be tasked to a primary candidate.
 
maxparrish said:
You're moving goal posts. You stated that "The so-called "normal" process is not normal in CO." . Now you are saying it isn't "normal" compared to what, every other state who "rolls out their own to be sure"?

As I pointed out earlier, Cruz won under the normal (the standard and expected) system for CO. There are a variety of other State systems, each with its own set of rules and circumstances. There is not a single "normal" outside the State of Co.

It's a representative Caucus system, where individuals are voted on delegates for the state convention, followed by their voting on the delegates to the national convention. Trump ignored that he needed those votes so, as usual when he loses, resorts to after the fact is smearing and lying about Colorado as if it were some nefarious system where "voters don't count". The obviously do count, but you have to participate and win.

The "CEO" has been, managerially, AWOL.
Click to expand...

CO's current evolution of the caucus system is indeed considered outside the norm by everyone but apparently you. It's byzantine, indecisive and creates a sort of superdelegate like the democrats have saddled their voters with. Here's the current structure.

Colorado caucus: 10 things you need to know - The Denver Post
 
Dittohead not! said:
Really?

Which of the candidates of '12 should they have nominated? Cain? Perry? Santorum?

Romney was the only viable candidate running.
Click to expand...
Viability/Electability is a surefire way to get milqtoast weaklings who change positions for the sake of convenience. Gingrich stood for something. Santorum stood for something. Both Rand and Ron stood for something. Hell even Chris Christie stood for something.

But these "electable/viable" types stand for nothing but their own lust for power. It's obvious in some cases. The Republican Party's support for individuals who stand for nothing but their own quest for power suggests that the party stands for nothing but it's own quest for power; principles be damned.
 
Exquisitor said:
But if you vote in a Republican Primary then you're a Republican voter.

How do you see what Bush did when he cut revenue, went to war on credit, handed over an economic crisis and then stalled the recovery?

How do you call this Party?

Will the Trumps Reganomics and cancelling Obamaromneycare put us on the road to recovery? And I don't ask this rhetorically.
Click to expand...

There are states that have open primarys, I live in fla it has closed primarys. I dont vote in republican primary elections.

Bush brought us to the economic collapse and brought us to war, you get no argument from me with that
 
As has been pointed out several times: Trump is NOT surging; Cruz is falling; Kasich is still in the race...

...and the Republican Party is looking like something out of a political nightmare.

The fate of the United States during the next three decades in on the line here. It is almost certain that three SCOTUS appointment will be made by the woman who wins this election. And since, unfortunately, the SCOTUS has been compromised into becoming a political hackery...its composition will determine how the country moves during the next 30 years...not the executive or legislative branches.

Hell of a mess!
 
clownboy said:
The RNC has a well funded grassroots machine complete with ready to go donors and "expert staff". These typically don't go to candidates until after the convention, but can easily be tasked to a primary candidate.
Click to expand...

In other words, you have no evidence for your claim of some "establishment conspiracy" for Romney so you speculate on how some "machine" might do so. You know, as well as I, that what can be "easily tasked" before the convention (be that true or not) does not mean it WAS tasked to nefarious ends.

Fevered imagination inventing how something MIGHT occur, is no evidence at all. Pulling made up narratives from the nether region is, more formally, known as motivated cognition.

You might reflect on your own need to believe things for which you have no evidence.
 
Cyrylek said:
Oh, be careful what you wish for! High negatives and all, Trump can win in November, if nominated. Populist magic is a real thing.
Click to expand...

Well, if only pissed off, uneducated white guys voted he might win. Unfortunately for the Trumpies, the electorate is bigger than that.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
What kind of senator or senate candidate would want to associate himself or herself with Donald trumps positions?
Click to expand...

Those that don't need women or minorities to vote for them.
 
maxparrish said:
You're moving goal posts. You stated that "The so-called "normal" process is not normal in CO." . Now you are saying it isn't "normal" compared to what, every other state who "rolls out their own to be sure"?

As I pointed out earlier, Cruz won under the normal (the standard and expected) system for CO. There are a variety of other State systems, each with its own set of rules and circumstances. There is not a single "normal" outside the State of Co.

It's a representative Caucus system, where individuals are voted on delegates for the state convention, followed by their voting on the delegates to the national convention. Trump ignored that he needed those votes so, as usual when he loses, resorts to after the fact is smearing and lying about Colorado as if it were some nefarious system where "voters don't count". The obviously do count, but you have to participate and win.

The "CEO" has been, managerially, AWOL.
Click to expand...

People continue to believe that the nominating process for President is somehow governed by some set of rules other than those decided on by the Parties. Understand this:

POLITICAL PARTIES ARE PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS. THEY CAN ESTABLISH WHATEVER THE HELL RULES THEY WANT TO GOVERN HOW THEIR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IS SELECTED.

What is so difficult for people out there to understand?
 
clownboy said:
CO's current evolution of the caucus system is indeed considered outside the norm by everyone but apparently you. It's byzantine, indecisive and creates a sort of superdelegate like the democrats have saddled their voters with. Here's the current structure.

Colorado caucus: 10 things you need to know - The Denver Post
Click to expand...

Apparently you are having difficulty defending points you made, so you are still dodging, issuing new unsupported claims, and changing the narrative. This just won't do. Until you own up to your increasingly long list errors I shan't let you skate.

You first claimed that "The so-called "normal" process is not normal in CO." . For the third time, please demonstrate what is "normal" in Colorado, and how that "normality" is established. Their system is their legal electoral standard and expected, so the caucus system was "normal" for Co. This should be obvious to even the most intellectually challenged Trump supporter.

You then implied it was not normal for other states. So for the second time, please demonstrate what is "normal" for the other 49 other states and how that "normal" is defined? As you have already acknowledged that their is a variety of different systems, each with its "rolled out" particulars, there is no such thing as normal, is there? Well, unless you believe that whenever Trump wins the system was "normal" and when he loses it's discovered to be "abnormal".

Finally, please show that "everyone" knows is abnormal except me? So far, the only "proof" you provide an article by one writer that does not even use the word "normal". In his view:

The caucus precinct meetings scheduled for Tuesday invoke a sepia tone image of politics that is an escape from the high-definition, million-dollar modern campaigns, where neighbors meet neighbors to discuss the issues of the day.

But for the less nostalgic, the caucus is antiquated and accessible only to the party's most fervent fans, a system that runs counter to the state's innovative mail-ballot mentality.
Click to expand...

Look up the definition of "normal". Antiquated or arcane or complex are not words synonymous with normal - if anything, it implies that the "normal" older system is outdated and due for an update.

So please, pay more attention to your theatrical charges. Be precise - Colorado's system might be "arcane", "unfair", "complex", or "prejudicial" ...but objecting to my phrase that election was normal (standard and expected) for Colorado is pretty darn stupid. OF COURSE it was normal for Colorado.
 
Honestly, after reading the drek in this election I have no idea what people think, especially those supporting Trump. I am pretty sure I know what they FEEL, but beyond their feelings emanating from the brains primal emotion lobes...well, its a mystery known only to them and God.

It amazes me how so many are willful tools, utterly ignorant of the system and willing to believe whatever Trump emotes. Its as if most voters are clueless as to the existence of caucus and/or convention systems...ascribing every eccentric feature of a system (when Trump loses) as an unexpected and shocking injustice.

How can people go through life this braindead?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom